Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Is The U.S. War Against The Islamic State Legal?

Photo: Capt. Nathan Michael Smith Credit U.S. Army

New York Times: An Army Captain Takes Obama to Court Over ISIS Fight

WASHINGTON — A 28-year-old army officer on Wednesday sued President Obama over the legality of the war against the Islamic State, setting up a test of Mr. Obama’s disputed claim that he needs no new legal authority from Congress to order the military to wage that deepening conflict.

The plaintiff, Capt. Nathan Michael Smith, an intelligence officer stationed in Kuwait, voiced strong support for fighting the Islamic State but, citing his “conscience” and his vow to uphold the Constitution, he said he believed that the conflict lacked proper authorization from Congress.

“To honor my oath, I am asking the court to tell the president that he must get proper authority from Congress, under the War Powers Resolution, to wage the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria,” he wrote.

Read more ....

Update #1: Army captain sues Obama over lack of ISIS war authorization (The Hill)
Update #2: Is America’s War on ISIS Illegal? (Bruce Ackerman, NYT)

WNU Editor: I am not surprised that someone is now bringing the U.S. government to court on what is the legal basis for America's war against the Islamic State .... I am just surprised that it has taken this long.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yes how else are we going to try out our new weapons on people

Anonymous said...

"I am just surprised that it has taken this long."
Well, I am not. This president is not white and, in the American context, this make all the difference.

Jay Farquharson said...

It has nothing to do with Obama's race.

Obama's using the 2001 AUMF that Bush got to target ISIS and everybody else, just as Bush used the 2001 to expand the War on Terror into Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Yemen.

If Obama's expanded use of the AUMF is unconstitutional, then so was Bush's,

so very few Republicans or Democrats are going to "challange" the expanded use of the AUMF,

Because other than 14 Reps and Senators, ( 6 Republicans and 8 Democrats), who have consistently questioned the expanded use of the AUMF,

any of the other of the 520 Reps or Senators questioning the expanded use of the AUMF just show themselves off as big fat, cynical hypocrites.